What do parties have to do with movements and ideologies?
Democratic Dilemmas: The Party and the Movements
By Todd Gitlin
Fall 2006
In heaven, possibly, ideals speak for themselves. But on earth ideals require translation; they require action. If the world were logically ordered, politics would begin with ends—so Plato and Aristotle would insist. But a little experience demonstrates that the ends crash and burn without means. So, over time, human beings have learned that their ideals need means, vessels, escorts—and that’s where the trouble begins. The need for means is the terrible requirement exacted by an unforgiving world, and in this requirement, and the possibility it creates of a fatal mismatch between ends and means, lies the taproot of political tragedy. Ideals are the necessary motives of practical action, but ideals without wherewithal are empty dreams, and ideals yoked to the wrong means are likely to turn into nightmares. ...
Comments
but a lot of experience demonstrates that different ends require different means. maybe here should arise parties that do not seek to combine ends.they should seek thier own ideals. thus a person could be a part of many parties,applying their suppoort to only to the ends they themselves wish to suppoort. this would mean to get the end realized its virtues must be explained fully and not disguised. if you believe that people are rational then they pick the best ideals. if you don't believe people are rational,then a two party system is the best we can hope for since they can be led to someone elses end. yea,i know,the"explitive deleted" world is far from the ideal, but is that a valid reason not to make a"explitive deleted" change?
Posted by: bobc![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.nyu.edu/classes/siva/nav-commenters.gif)
|
November 21, 2006 04:39 PM